Arun Kumar Poddar, Kolkata V. I.T.O Wd - 44(2),kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 1094/KOL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4439 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 4 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-09-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 11-05-2017
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 07-05-2013
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NOS. 1094, 1095 & 1096/KOL./2013 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2007-2008, 2008-2009 & 2009-2010 PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA A BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NOS. 1094, 1095 & 1096 /KOL/ 2013 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2007-2008, 2008-2009 & 2009-2010 ARUN KUMAR PODDAR,................................. ...........................APPELLANT 21, CAMAC STREET, KOLKATA-700 016 [PAN : AFKPP 4352 B] -VS.- INCOME TAX OFFICER,................................ ...............................RESPONDENT WARD-44(2), KOLKATA, 3, GOVERNMENT PLACE (WEST), KOLKATA-700 001 APPEARANCES BY: N O N E, FOR THE ASSESSEE SHRI RAJAT KUMAR BISWAS, CIT, D.R., FOR THE DEPARTMENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : SEPTEMBER 14, 201 6 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : SEPTEMBER 14, 2016 O R D E R PER BENCH : THESE THREE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIREC TED AGAINST THREE SEPARATE ORDERS, ALL DATED 19.02.2013 PASSED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-XXX, KOLKATA FOR A.YS. 2007-08 , 2008-09 AND 2009- 10. 2. IN THIS CASE, THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE INITIALLY FIXED FOR HEARING ON 27.04.2016. THE ASSESSEE, HOWEVER, SOUGH T ADJOURNMENT ON THE SAID DATE AND ACCORDINGLY THE HEARING WAS ADJOU RNED TO 13.06.2016. THE ASSESSEE AGAIN SOUGHT ADJOURNMENT ON 13.06.2016 AND ACCORDINGLY THE HEARING WAS ADJOURNED TO 22.08.2016. ON 22.08.2 016, THE ASSESSEE AGAIN SOUGHT ADJOURNMENT AND ACCORDINGLY THE CASE W AS FINALLY ADJOURNED TO 14.09.2016. ON 14.09.2016, I.E. TODAY, NONE, HOW EVER, HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY APPLICATION SEEKING ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN I.T.A. NOS. 1094, 1095 & 1096/KOL./2013 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2007-2008, 2008-2009 & 2009-2010 PAGE 2 OF 2 FILED. IT APPEARS FROM THIS CONDUCT OF THE ASSESSEE THAT HE IS NOT SERIOUSLY INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THESE APPEALS FILED BEFOR E THE TRIBUNAL. 3. THE LAW ASSISTS THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT AND NOT T HOSE WHO SLEEP OVER THEIR RIGHTS. THIS PRINCIPLE IS EMBODIED IN THE WEL L KNOWN DICTUM - VIGILANTIBUS, NON DORMIENTIBUS, JURA SUBVENIENT. CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND KEEPING IN MIND THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE ITAT RULES AS WAS CONSIDERED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS.- MULTIPLAN INDIA PVT. LTD. 38 ITD 320 (DEL.) AND THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE MADHYA PRADE SH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS.- C.W.T . REPORTED IN 223 ITR 480, WE TREAT THESE APPEALS AS UNADMITTED AND DISMI SS THE SAME FOR NON- PROSECUTION. 4. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON SEPTEMBER 14, 2016. SD/- SD/- (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) (P.M. JAGTAP) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT ME MBER KOLKATA, THE 14 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2016 COPIES TO : (1) SHRI ARUN KUMAR PODDAR, C/O. SHRI R.P. SHARMA, ADVOCATE, 19/D, MUKTARAM BABU STREET, KOLKATA-700 007 (2) INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-44(2), KOLKATA, 3, GOVERNMENT PLACE (WEST), KOLKATA-700 001 (3) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-XXX, KOL KATA; (4) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- , (5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA LAHA/SR. P.S.